Labor Board Ruling May Bar Millions of Workers from Forming Unions

[Omaha Steve]

http://blog.aflcio.org/2006/10/03/labor-board-ruling-may-bar-millions-of-workers-from-forming-unions/

Labor Board Ruling May Bar Millions of Workers from Forming Unions

by James Parks, Oct 3, 2006

The Republican-dominated National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) voted along party lines to slash long-time federal labor laws protecting workers’ freedom to form unions and opened the door for employers to classify millions of workers as supervisors. Under federal labor law, supervisors are prohibited from forming unions.

The NLRB ruled on three cases, collectively known as “Kentucky River,” but it’s the lead case Oakwood Healthcare Inc. that creates a new definition of supervisor. Dozens of cases involving the definition of supervisor now before the NLRB will be sent back, with employers having the option to craft arguments that will meet the new definition of supervisor and limit the number of workers who can join a union.

Although the Oakwood decision covers only nurses, the expanded definition of superviors means up to 8 million workers, including nurses, building trades workers, newspaper and television employees and others may be barred from joining unions. In Oakwood, the board agreed with the employer that charge nurses are supervisors. But the ruling also sets broad definitions for determining who is a supervisor that invites employers to classify nurses and many low-level employees with minor authority as supervisors. The decision was issued Sept. 29 but not released until today.


Vanessa Quinn, a nurse in Kenmore, N.Y., says the labor board’s decision is a disaster for nurses.

The board’s new definition essentially enables employers to make a supervisor out of any worker who has the authority to assign or direct another and uses independent judgment. Amazingly, the board also ruled that a worker can be classified as a supervisor if he or she spends as little as 10 percent to 15 percent of his or her time overseeing the work of others.

FULL story at link above.

[Lars39]

1. K&R !

Horrible.

[rodeodance]

2. this really is BAD news!

[rodeodance]

3. REc

[Warpy]

4. Half the nurses in this country have quit the profession

and the reason most often cited is the brutal working conditions.

This should take care of the other half.

Any hospital that tries to institute this will find itself with a lot of unfilled nursing positions.

Any unionized hospital that tries this will face a strike.

[ninkasi]

10. That's what came to mind when I read the headline

Nursing is an enormously demanding profession, and I feel that they have been overworked and underpaid for years. So naturally, the Republicans want to place more of a burden on them, and pay them less. This is not the way to retain qualified, dedicated nurses. I am not a nurse, by the way, nor do I know any nurses personally.

My opinion has been formed from the patient's point of view. I have experienced first-hand the effect that nurses have on the quality of care patients receive. This is a huge mistake.

[rodeodance]

25. this happened in a hospital seveal yers ago--many nurses labeled

"management"------ by administration. This is terrible----if allowed to stand.

[Kolesar]

36. "Onerous working conditions", maybe? ... eom

[Megahurtz]

5. Now That's It!!!

This is just so far over the line it's not even fathomable anymore!

WTF is this Administration trying to do, kill us?
Send us all out in the streets to collect bottles and cans???:wtf:

[sam sarrha]

6. and... supervisors dont get paid overtime..time and a half..

[partylessinOhio]

7. Another American tragedy! Workers have fought long and hard for their

right to form unions to protect their rights for wages, benefits and safe working conditions. This is our country too, it doesn't belong to Repugs.

I know there has been a constant drumbeat against unions. Do not be misled. If it weren't for unions most workers would be earning minimum wages at best. Would you like to return to those dark ages?

[IndianaGreen]

8. We live under a Fascist dictatorship, what did we expect?

Our tyrant Bush wants to turn this planet into a slave planet in which everyone becomes a servant of the ruling classes.

[readmoreoften]

9. When the decided on the status of graduate assistants

They said that they were not workers because they were students, and if they aren't students then they're management anyway because they are managing a classroom.

[texpatriot2004]

11. Unions are the only things looking after the rights of the workers

these days.

[Omaha Steve]

12. Act Now to Defend Workers from KY River Decision simple E form

http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/ky_river_assault?rk=YpSudid1SqjmE

To take action click the link above.



The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) voted today to crush longstanding Federal labor laws protecting workers' right to join a union. The NLRB ruled on three cases, collectively known as "Kentucky River", but it is their decision on Oakwood Healthcare, Inc which could have a devastating impact on workers’ right to join a union. The board’s ruling essentially enables employers to make a supervisor out of any worker who has the authority to assign or direct another and uses independent judgment. They ruled that any worker can be classified as a supervisor if he or she spends as little as 10-15% of his or her time overseeing the work of others. Under current Federal labor laws, supervisors are prohibited from forming unions. The ruling could deny up to 8 million workers the right to choose union representation.

[AX10]

13. K & R!

[depakid]

14. Supervisors = no overtime

Strike nother blow for the so caled "family values" crowd.

[MGKrebs]

15. Hmm. This may have unintended consequences.

Employers will be tempted to classify workers as supervisors by giving them additional authority that they might not otherwise get. This could result in a bunch of unqualified "supervisors".

Or uneven application of the ruling will create resentment in other employees who see themselves as equal to the new "supervisors".

Also, workers who suddenly get classified as "supervisors" may expect higher pay, union or no union.

There also may be a bunch of workers who feel like they are overseeing others' work but are not getting the classification and the presumed extra pay to go with it, creating resentment.

Also, this very well may push the left-out workers toward a union more strongly than the typical union invitations.

This might be setting up some serious workplace strain.

[ngant17]

17. seems like some confusion at least

On one side, it would seem to make labor organizing more easier, as you only need 30% of hourly-paid workforce to start the voting process and to bring in a union. If you increase the number of supervisory personnel, then the percentages of union-material workers are also reduced which would mean a smaller number of votes needed to start the organizing vote.

However, this law may have a double-edged sword and you can't be sure yet whose votes would be counted in that process yet. There is no such thing as an hourly-paid manager or supervisor, they work typically on a salary which is separate from the worker's pay rates.

Sounds like a lot of this new law will have legal challenges before we can see what is going to really happen for the non-unionized workers.

[LiberalFighter]

24. What's the point of supervising someone if you can't hire or fire them?

Will they have them supervise each other? A supervises B and B supervises A

[Anakin Skywalker]

16. Ooh. My Chance for a Promotion?

Ooh ooh (All excited). I get to be a supervisor? This means I can boss people around! :evilgrin:

[davhill]

35. Yes but

You will only earn half as much as the people you "supervise"

[alfredo]

18. Oakwood was so poorly managed they had to close it down.

I can see why the Repugs sided with management.

[earth mom]

19. When will this god damn EVIL bullshit end?!

:grr: :grr: :grr:

[wholetruth00]

22. When will Democrats put these issues before the public and push back?

And when will the American public become more concerned about their own civil liberties and Constitutional protections instead of the talking point agenda of the Republicans and sex scandals?

[KAZ]

20. And we're not storming the White House, why?

When will we have finally "had enough"?

[cap]

21. Nurses should quit en masse

pick one fine day like Halloween and hand in their resignation and quit. Give two weeks notice and demand that Congress put a law into effect that renders this null and void. This should apply for all industries and not just nursing.

There is no way they could get sufficient H1Bs into the hospitals to replace them. It sucks for the patients but I dont blame the nurses.

[patrick t. cakes]

23. wheres union leadership

nowadays. we need a second coming of eugene and emma.

[Omaha Steve]

38. McEntee Assails Shameless NLRB Decision to Deprive Millions of Workers of

http://www.afscme.org/12154.cfm

From my International President.

For IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Wednesday, October 04, 2006
McEntee Assails Shameless NLRB Decision to Deprive Millions of Workers of Union Rights

Today's three decisions announced by the National Labor Relations Board irreparably change the landscape of the American workplace by giving private-sector employers a license to deprive millions of workers of their freedom to form a union.

In Oakwood Healthcare, Inc., the lead case, the Board set forth a new standard for determining supervisors. This new standard expands the universe for workers who will now be considered supervisors depriving them of any rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Although two decisions found that the workers were employees, not supervisors, the Board's new standard will make it easier to exclude workers, especially professional employees, from the Act's protections.

This shameless decision is a cheap, semantic trick by the NLRB, which we now know stands for the National League of Republican Businessmen. Clearly, the Bush administration and its cronies will stop at nothing to turn back the clock on America’s workers until they are the modern-day equivalent of serfs in a feudal society with no rights and no respect.

The American labor movement has built its reputation on improving the lives of countless workers and will not silently stand by and let the NLRB hand over workers’ rights to opportunistic employers without a fight. We can’t afford two more years of wrong choices.

Expect workers to participate in the November elections like never before by mobilizing to take back America in 2006. We're going to elect U.S. Senators who will insist that nominees to the NLRB be fair and impartial and ultimately get this decision reversed.

[patrick t. cakes]

40. thats reassuring....

ive heard nothing but crickets from my local. I.B.E.W. 347. im definitely itching for a fight. also too many right wingers in my local, kinda frightning.

[xchrom]

26. k&r

this is incredibly important news.

[Moderator]

27. Kick

[Karenca]

28. Board Redefines Rules for Union Exemption - New York Times

The republican agenda has always included union breaking.

People won't notice this today, because they all aquiver with the SEX scandal, but this begins the process of denying Americans the right to unionize. The union movement, begun in the early 20th century was very hard won and included a lot of violence. Remember, there were the famous signs in factories, "If you don't come in Sunday, don't come in Monday."
I was a union member. The scum jobs that I had would have been so much worse if not for the unions.

The despicable, racist homophobes who call themselves Republicans-- people who don't want to vote Democratic because they fear minorities and homosexuals are so INCREDIBLY STUPID. THEY VOTE AGAINST THEIR OWN INTERESTS EVERY TIME. Unionization has vastly improved the lives of working people and they're on their way toward losing the right to unionize. It's sad that they're so stupid and keep voting for their own ruin. 1984 happens a little more every day.

Full article LINK : http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/04/washington/04labor.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin

< Board Redefines Rules for Union Exemption

By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
Published: October 4, 2006
In a decision condemned by unions but praised by business, the National Labor Relations Board issued a ruling yesterday that will exempt registered nurses — and many other workers — from union membership if they have certain kinds of supervisory duties.

Some labor experts predicted that the ruling could affect more than eight million workers who might also be deemed supervisors, including teachers who oversee aides. The board’s 3-to-2 decision involved nurses overseeing shifts at a Michigan hospital.

But in two related cases, the board ruled that workers with limited supervisory duties were not supervisors.
Labor unions have long feared such a decision, so much so that, in an unusual move, they held demonstrations at the labor board’s offices in July to urge it not to issue an expansive ruling that would exempt many workers from union coverage. >

[w4rma]

29. I see no reason whatsoever that any supervisor shouldn't be able to join

or form a union. *any* supervisor. I currently think only the specific unions themselves should be able to decide to exclude members of management.

[MGKrebs]

34. Yeah, how's this going to work with airline pilots?

[Kolesar]

37. I was trying to think of the exception to this and I think you found it

Now I am trying to figure the reason that supervisors cannot be in the union (by law). Is it so that the company does not take control of the union?

[pooja]

30. If anyone in Union is smart... they will come to Florida and get

the hospitality industry to strike for unions. Here is an industry that makes billions off of the world travllers and still pays most of its worker min. wage, min. benefits, horrible hours, no holidays, no sick pay... absolutely nothing for that service with a smile. Is it any wonder why the biggest complaint with a hotel or restraunt is staffing issues.

[davsand]

31. NLRB has been selling out workers for a while now.

They are GOP whores and appointees. This kind of ruling comes as no shock, but it does make me feel ill. Remember, we live in sa country now where union membership is viewed as a "security risk" (Just ask the AFSCME members who lost their local at the Homeland Security Dept...) I have no doubt that we'll start to see Union membership deionized even further--possibly to the point it was during the "Palmer Raids." They have the laws on the books now, it is just a matter of time, IMO


Learn a bit more about the Palmer Raids here: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAredscare.htm




Laura

[rodeodance]

32. This is terrible--esp for nureses!

[fladonkey]

33. Another.....

nail in the coffin of organized labor.

[Hope springs eternal]

39. even worse when you consider

that many jobs can be done overseas and that immigrants can take what's left of here.


Makes me want to move to europe.

[peacebuzzard]

41. 1= megacorporations ; 0= labor.

this march for corporate control needs to be stopped.

[Occulus]

42. eliminate corporate personhood and it WILL stop n/t

[dogfacedboy]

43. I'm a "one man department". I guess that makes me my supervisor.

I get orders directly from sales, I do my own programming, scheduling, material ordering, and I produce the product. This isn't good, as some of us at work recently talked about organizing. We want salary increases, and some help on our health insurance costs.

These ass hats are so out of touch with working America.